Officially, US debt stands at more than $17 trillion. In reality, it is many
times more. The cost of the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq may be more
than six trillion dollars. President Obama's illegal invasion of Libya cost
at least a billion dollars and left that country devastated. The costs of US
regime change efforts in Syria are likely thus far enormous, both in dollars
and lives. That's still a secret.
So who in his right mind would think it is a good time to start a war with
Russia over Ukraine? And worse, who would commit the United States to bail
out a Ukraine that will need at least $35 billion to survive the year?
Who? The president and Congress, backed by the neocons and the so-called humanitarian
interventionists!
The House voted overwhelmingly last week to provide $1 billion in loan guarantees
to Ukraine. That is just the beginning, you can be sure. But let's be clear:
this is not money for the population of that impoverished country. The Administration
is sending a billion dollars from US taxpayers to wealthy international bankers
who hold Ukrainian debt. It is an international bank bailout, not aid to Ukrainians.
And despite the escalating anti-Russia rhetoric, ironically some of that money
will likely go to Russia for Ukraine's two billion dollar unpaid gas bill!
So what happened in Ukraine? The US government and media claims that the US
must save Ukrainian democracy from an invading Russian army that is threatening
the country's sovereignty. But in reality the crisis was instigated in part
by US meddling. Remember the intercepted telephone call in which two senior
Obama Administration officials discussed plans to replace the elected government
in Ukraine with US puppets? That is exactly what happened. Is that not a violation
of Ukraine's sovereignty? Is that what democracy is all about?
The Obama Administration's policy toward Ukraine is hypocritical. The overthrow
of the government in Kiev by violent street protests was called a triumph of
democracy, but when the elected parliament in autonomous Crimea voted last
week to hold a referendum to decide its future, President Obama condemned it
as a violation of international law. What about the principle of self-determination,
which is also enshrined in international law?
I have long thought that a referendum to reorganize Ukraine into a looser
confederation of regions might help reduce tensions. I still believe this could
help, but it seems the US government is not so enthusiastic about democracy
when there is a chance for an outcome it opposes.
I strongly believe that Crimeans have every right to transfer sovereignty
over their peninsula to Russia if they wish. The only question that remains
is whether there will there be an honest election, and I don't see any reason
there can't be.
The US government tells the rest of the world, "We want you to be good democrats
and have elections," but if they don't elect the right people then we complain
about it and throw them out, like we did in Egypt. In Crimea they want to have
an election to determine their future. President Obama condemned those plans
for a vote by saying, "We are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn
over the heads of democratic leaders." Does he not remember that the authorities
in Kiev were installed just weeks ago after a US-backed coup against the Ukrainian
constitution?
Congress next week will likely vote for sanctions against Russia. Though many
mistakenly believe that sanctions are a relatively harmless way of forcing
foreign countries to do what we say, we should be clear: sanctions are an act
of war.
Cooler heads in the United States are not currently prevailing. There is a
danger of an unimaginable conflict between the US and Russia. We must demand
a shift away from a war footing, away from incendiary rhetoric. We are broke
and cannot afford to "buy" Ukraine. We certainly cannot afford another war,
especially with Russia!
